There was one part of the interview which made me cringe - but sadly is just a sign of the times - and that was when Tim Cain mentioned in response to a question on whether a really good idea was enough to get a publisher's interest: "I don't know if a good idea is enough anymore. I've been fortunate enough that twice I had an opportunity to make a game based on an idea, with no business plan, no demographic studies, anything like that." He then continues to say that Fallout 1 was made partly because Interplay didn't want a new RPG in yet another fantasy setting that would compete with their own DnD based games. So they - the publishers - actually wanted a creative game that was unique, rather than follow the "flood the market, being creative is too 'risky' and doesn't fit demographic_X" strategies of today. Obviously, the business side of things is a necessary evil that must be taken into account to at least some degree, but I wish there was a less rigid system in place for developers to strike a balance between business necessities and creative freedom.

Also interesting: Tim looking back on Fallout 1's development, where according to Tim, Interplay didn't even look at what they were doing for the first 2 years of the 3 that it took to develop. No publisher interference? I wonder why it was such a creative, incredible game…

Originally Posted by Nerevarine
Also interesting: Tim looking back on Fallout 1's development, where according to Tim, Interplay didn't even look at what they were doing for the first 2 years of the 3 that it took to develop. No publisher interference? I wonder why it was such a creative, incredible game…

If I'm right (and I may be remembering incorrectly), Tim was alone the first year, coming up with the basis of Fallout; that's not to say he wasn't responsible for other work, however…